Sigma SD 14

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by S, Jan 5, 2008.

  1. The kind of "wacko" who can afford it and appreciates that there is no
    one camera out there that will serve all of one's needs. I'm poor so I
    only have a Nikon and a Sigma. Sometimes I think it would be nice to
    also have a Canon for it's high ISO performance though.
     
    Michael Tuthill, Jan 22, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. You seem to have a well versed, rounded knowledge of
    I may not agree often with Mr Strat, but here, he is corrrect.
    Yeah. Sure Doug. Was that before you were a decorated Canadian
    Mountie? After you single-handledly brought back Apollo 13? Around
    the same time you were revolutionising Linux programming and leading
    the world in enlarging technology?

    Actually, quite few. A few goodun's too.
    We are talking about cameras, you twat.
    Oh, and did you forget:
    - scary (and often unfixable) colour balance, jaundiced skintones,
    colour clipping and false blues
    - jaggies (often confused by amateurs with sharpness)
    - colour changes with ISO
    - colour changes and unacceptable noise in long exposures
    - no PC synch
    - raw only output, poor raw processor
    - overpriced for a camera that produced resolution roughly equivalent
    to a 6Mp
    We agree. They only managed to slightly improve the colour accuracy
    clipping problems, but it got *worse* at high ISOs and long
    exposures. Oh and they improved the raw processor. Wow.
    Too bad most of it was chasing the Foveon dream. It was a nice dream,
    but one would have to assume that they simply cannot get this sensor
    to improve at the rate it needs to, to even get near the current crop
    of Bayer sensors. The dead horse has been kicked a bit far, imo.
    Yeah, Doug. I'm on Canon's payroll too, then I guess.
    Again we agree!
    No, It's NOT OK. The SD-14 manages to be roughly equivalent to a ten
    megapixel camera, not a 14. Both camps lie, so I'll concede that it
    is not a clear cut situation. There's an interesting article here:
    http://www.ddisoftware.com/sd14-5d/
    I have a lot of time for Mike Chaney, and so that page should give
    Sigma supporters some comfort.
    But I think he overemphasises the resolution and 3d-issues, forgetting
    the colour accuracy issues, lousy high ISO/long exposure performance,
    and the fact that you lock yourself into Sigma lenses at a ridiculous
    price.

    And the false sharpness/lack of aliasing can be a big problem, eg
    here:
    http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/sd14-po-002_crop.jpg
    This is an actual size crop from one of Sigma's sample images. Let's
    not discuss the flesh tone...but take a look at the hair strands.
    Note how they break into stair stepped segments - revealing the false
    'sharpness'! It may seem razor sharp, but look out for the moire and
    jaggies... Bayer sensors are indeed fuzzier, but they are already,
    price-wise, way ahead of the SD14's resolution (roughly 8-9Mp
    equivalent) once you realistically assess them.

    Then there is their honesty..

    http://www.sigma-sd14.com/sample-photo/still-life/

    Take a look at the full-res version of the last pic, SL001.
    Impressive, yes?
    But now wind up the gamma/brightness... They have photoshopped the
    background out! How can you trust a company that does that, on
    allegedly sample images??
    Yes. We've seen your enlarging prowess and your quality standards.
    Just ask Colin D about his *stitched* image sample... I'm sure you
    and Sigma would get on very well.
     
    mark.thomas.7, Jan 22, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Nope!

    November 2007 is when it all changed! Trust me, people weren't buying Canon
    bodies for their "quality" or should I say lack of it. The 5D is a prime
    example of a decent FF sensor wrapped in a body made of pure shit. People
    were buying Canon bodies for high-ISO performance and an inexpensive FF
    sensor. Now that the Nikon D3 is decimating the competition with its
    amazing performance most Canon shooters are migrating back to Nikon. If
    Canon could produce decent lenses they might have a chance of getting back
    in the game.





    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 22, 2008
  4. Yep, Canon intentionally designed the EOS mount for the sake of attracting
    photographers that had decent glass that didn't want to buy substandard
    Canon glass.
    November 2007 is when it all changed! Trust me, people weren't buying Canon
    bodies for their "quality" or should I say lack of it. The 5D is a prime
    example of a decent FF sensor wrapped in a body made of pure shit. People
    were buying Canon bodies for high-ISO performance and an inexpensive FF
    sensor. Now that the Nikon D3 is decimating the competition with its
    amazing performance most Canon shooters are migrating back to Nikon. If
    Canon could produce decent lenses they might have a chance of getting back
    in the game.





    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 22, 2008
  5. S

    George Kerby Guest

    Spoken like an expert who has been mounted by most anything with two or four
    legs...
     
    George Kerby, Jan 22, 2008
  6. S

    Mr.T Guest

    Do you really believe all the crap you sprout!!!
    For such a "great" company it took them an AWFULLY long time then to come up
    with something the pro's might actually want to use then!

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, Jan 22, 2008
  7. S

    Cryptopix Guest

    dealer before I retired. Sure> > thay did have a few flakey lenses in
    the early days. Canon have just> > as many, you know? Yes, the SD9 had
    some problems with low light and> > deep shadows. The SD 10 wasn't a
    hell of a lot better either but let's> > not forget or overlook the
    size of the company and the enormous> > percentage of profit they
    devoted to research over the past 4 years> > that resulted in some
    pretty decent products arriving last year.People> > like you seem to
    be on the payroll of Canon. Paid to bash anything> > that looks like a
    threat to Canon.> > That's a funny comment coming from the guy who
    posed as George Preddy> and shilled Sigmas on these newsgroups for so
    long.  FWIW, it was your> Preddy Cat pics that outed you.It's your
    bare ass that outed you
     
    Cryptopix, Jan 22, 2008
  8. Good things are worth waiting for! You don't see massive recalls on Nikon
    equipment for good reason. They take their time and get it right at the
    factory instead of using their customers as beta testers. Nikon equipment
    simply works great and doesn't fail in the field when and where you need it
    the most.





    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 22, 2008
  9. One wonders what kind of a wacko cares about why someone has three different
    brands.
     
    Peter Stavrakoglou, Jan 23, 2008
  10. S

    Mr. Strat Guest

    At one time, I owned two Hasselblads, a Pentax 6x7, an RB 67, my
    ancient 1969 Pentax Spotmatic, a Polaroid SX-70, a Nimslo 3D, and a
    Calumet 4x5 view camera.
     
    Mr. Strat, Jan 23, 2008
  11. S

    SMS Guest

    It _is_ quite odd to see that. Most people stick with one lens mount,
    maybe two if they switched systems for whatever reason. A lot of pros
    switched to Canon because Nikon took so long to bring a full frame
    camera to market, and it's possible that they'll switch back.
     
    SMS, Jan 23, 2008
  12. S

    Mr.T Guest

    OK, wait another 10 years then and see what Canon comes up with :)
    So true!

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, Jan 23, 2008
  13. I'm just waiting for the day that Canon acquires the ability and the desire
    to make decent glass. It's getting to be a real strain for Nikon to supply
    the world market lenses for both the Nikon and Canon platforms.





    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 23, 2008
  14. S

    Mr. Strat Guest

    When are you going to stop using drugs?
     
    Mr. Strat, Jan 23, 2008
  15. S

    George Kerby Guest

    When the sex change is complete.
     
    George Kerby, Jan 23, 2008
  16. S

    Mr.T Guest

    Funny, I haven't heard Nikon complaining of any strain. :)
    OTOH I don't know anyone else using Nikon lenses on Canon bodies like you.
    Most pro's just buy the L series lenses and use them to take far better
    pictures than any you have shown!

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, Jan 24, 2008
  17. S

    SMS Guest

    It's hard to imagine anyone trying to use Nikon lenses on Canon. In
    fact, if you have a collection of Nikon AI lenses, you are better off
    buying a Canon digital SLR, and a Nikkor AI to Canon EOS adapter ring,
    than buying a low end Nikon digital SLR, since metering still works on
    the Canon. This may be cheaper than paying to get a bunch of lenses
    modified (Note that on higher end Nikon's metering does work with AI
    lenses).

    Furthermore, Canon L glass is not only of equivalent or better quality
    as Nikon's high-end glass, Canon has many high-end L lenses for which
    there is no Nikon equivalent. This is why so many professionals had to
    switch to Canon, especially sports photographers. It's why you see a sea
    of BWLs (big white lenses) at sporting events. With either manufacturer
    you can pick out a specific lens that is better than the competition,
    but it's rare for there to be enough of a difference to worry about.
     
    SMS, Jan 24, 2008
  18. The day Canon can reliably and *CONSISTENTLY* produce decent glass.





    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 24, 2008
  19. What's hard to image about using any Nikkor that has an aperture ring on a
    Canon body? You're getting the best of both worlds (prior to November 2007)
    having the world's best glass on a high-ISO performing sensor. Since I now
    have the D3 it's time to permanently mothball the adapters.
    Which ones would these be? Admittedly Nikon does need a 24/1.4 AFS. Canon
    really needs an 85mm lens that will perform.
    Right! Buy both brands and come back and tell me that again. I made the
    mistake of buying a 500/4L IS thinking that I was going to dump Nikon and
    thought I had a bargain. Only to find out it was more economical for me to
    buy the Nikkor equivalent for $2,000 more. You see more "white" lenses
    because people only factor in low price instead of quality. And now with
    Nikon's FF high-ISO sensor and super telephoto lenses sporting VR that are
    considerably more expensive than the "white" lenses you will be seeing more
    "black" lenses at these events. Once you go black you'll never go back.





    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 24, 2008
  20. S

    Mr. Strat Guest

    I have nothing against Nikon, but Canon remains at the top of the heap.
    You shouldn't live in denial.
     
    Mr. Strat, Jan 24, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.