File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
FUCK THIS SHIT

Sigma UK has announced the price of its DP1 large sensor compact. The basic camera will initially sell for £549 or £599 with the optional viewfinder. This puts it squarely in entry-level DSLR territory - distinctly affordable for photographers committed to achieving large-sensor image quality. Sigma US has set an MSRP of $999.
>> fail fail
failfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfa
>> Anonymous
£599... !?

for a plastic box?
>> Anonymous
I'd buy it in an instant if I wanted a lens that wide. I'm very much one for normal focal lengths.

The slow lens doesn't really matter too much... it's designed for street, first of all. Some DoF is good for that.

Second, it's not that much of a limitation. Mike Johnston put it out pretty well here (http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2007/03/tales-of-self-obstruction-and-sigma-dp.html), talking about Sam Abell and his Kodachrome 25 and f/1.4 prime, which is the exact same as ISO 200 and f/4. Or someone whose work is more street-oriented: I know David Alan Harvey used Velvia 50 exclusively for his Cuba book, and an M6 with a 35/1.4, 28/2.8, and 50/1.4, primarily the 35/1.4. That would mean one would have to shoot at ISO 400 to get the same exposure as the 35/1.4 wide open. Not hard for an APS-C sensor. From there, any higher sensititives are only advantages. It also means that, for the same field of view, that at ISO 100 the Sigma will equal Harvey's 28/2.8. Huge benefits there.

It's a dedicated camera for street work and documentary photography where an SLR is too obtrusive in many cases, a cheap stand-in for a Leica M8. Not a jack-of-all-tricks replacement for an SLR. The only huge flaw with it is that the lens is too wide.

I do get a feeling, just from looking at the camera, that Sigma designed the lens around the body, and not the other way around, as it should be. It's physically a very small lens, which would explain its slow speed and short focal length. And the camera is small- 109x60x31- compared to even the 121x76x32 Leica CL, which is more than small enough for most people's purposes.
>> Anonymous
They could've made interchangeable lenses. How hard could it be?
>> Anonymous
>>126526
Not hard, and that's another strange thing about it. Sigma is a lens company. They should've been excited about getting to have an exclusive product with an exclusive lens mount and a small lens line for it: say, this one, a 24/2, and a 50/2. Or some specs along those lines.
>> Anonymous
>>126517failfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfailfa

What he said.
>> Anonymous
>>126524
The problem is, a top-of-the-line compact like Canon G9 can do almost everything DP1 does for half the price.
>> Anonymous
>>126536
the point is dp1 has better sensor than most of the compacts will ever have
>> Anonymous
>>126539
Think about it. Why do people want a bigger sensor?
First up, DoF. But with a lens so wide and so slow, you still won't get any dramatic out-of-focus backgrounds with the DP1.
Second, low noise. No luck here too: Foveon is noisier at higher ISOs even than the worst Four Thirds sensors. It offers maybe 1.5 stop advantage over a 2/3" sensor in the G9, and most of this advantage is killed outright by the slower aperture of the lens.
Oh, and did I mention the lack of IS? It means that for static scenes, a compact with IS may give BETTER quality than the DP1.
>> Anonymous
lol all these people whining about the price.

"BUT I CANT CHANGE LENSES??? BUT MY REBEL XT CAN ]:"
>> Anonymous
>>126688

lurk more faggot
>> Anonymous
naw i'll just laugh at you guys instead :]
>> Anonymous
>>126690

what's so funny
>> Anonymous
>>126544

BBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWW

don't buy it then
>> Anonymous
I'd buy it if it were a little cheaper and had a 35mm eqiv. lens. I'd been using a 35/3.5 Leitz Summaron for ages until I finally caved and bought a 50/1.8 over Christmas, so the speed isn't that big of a deal.

I'm kinda pissed that it looks so ugly though. Ricoh got it right with the GR-D - now that is one hot camera.
>> Anonymous
>>126705
I wasn't going to buy it anyway. I'm just pissed at people buying Sigma's "ZOMFG revolution in compact cameras!!!" bullshit when it's not really revolutionary from a practical standpoint.
>> Anonymous
>>126735
A) Even if Foveon sensors suck at high sensitivies- something I've never ssen demonstrated- the larger sensor will still provide more DR than a compact sensor.
B) Even if the camera sucked monsterous donkey balls and was the worst camera ever made, it would still be revolutionary, in the same way the first 35mm camera, or the first autofocus camera, etc. were revolutionary. Whether they've done it well or not is debatable, but Sigma has indeed nade a pretty bold step marketing-wise.
>> Anonymous
>>126752
I haven't seen any demonstration that Foveon can provide more DR than any other sensor (compact or otherwise), either.
>> Anonymous
>>126757
It's taken for granted. Larger sensors provide more DR, as a general rule. Someone has to do something really stupid to change that.
>> Anonymous
>>126819
Larger sensors made with the same technology, which isn't the case here.
>> Anonymous
>>126821

I don't see why Foveon would reduce dynamic range.
>> Anonymous
>>126829
I dunno, for the same reason SuperCCD increases it?