Let’s see whether the age difference between the two cameras makes a significant impact in their performance. I’m continually astonished by the lifelike reds that these cameras are capable of capturing, and I agree that the greens are noteworthy as well. I had a DP2M a few years back and was pleased with it for what it was capable of producing…beautiful shots, though a little sluggish to deal with. Apple has previously said that the format was just too different from normal Bayer to be worth attempting to include into the system.
Contrast on the Street
The Q significantly reduces the time it takes to write files. Jpegs taken with the M are worthless, but with the Q, the quality is unexpectedly decent, and high ISO performance is much improved. In terms of color, ISO 200 and ISO 400, if there is no other option, are the highest ISO settings I would recommend for the Merrills.
Comparison of the Sigma Dp2 Merrill and the Sigma Dp2 Quattro Sensors
An electronic viewfinder would have eliminated this problem and made the shooting experience more pleasurable. Sigma is launching an optical viewfinder (OVF) for the Quattro, however combining an OVF with a digital camera has some challenges. For begin, imagine you were shooting with the LCD turned off and wanted to frame using the optical viewfinder.
We all know that RAW files are not and will never be compatible with Lightroom or any other Adobe software, as I’ve noted on more than one time. I’ve also addressed the absence of an EVF on more than one occasion. Another issue is the absence of a swivel LCD, as well as the poor battery life and low ISO performance, or the lack thereof. Even with these flaws, the image quality produced by this camera is excellent, and it is far faster than the previous generation of DP cameras. Aside from that, I have found an old passion of mine – Fujichrome Velvia film, which I have been shooting with my beloved old medium format SLR. Several rolls of film have returned from processing, mostly portraits taken with a modified Hasselblad/Zeiss Planar 150 f/2,8 and a few landscapes shot with a Hasselblad XP2 film camera.
Both cameras have a maximum aperture of f2.80 at the broad end of their zoom range. The Sigma DP2 Merrill offers a 5mm greater reach than the Sigma DP2 Quattro when it comes to telephoto lenses. At the telephoto end, both cameras have a maximum aperture of f2.80. Before we get into our more in-depth comparison of the Sigma DP2 Merrill and Sigma DP2 Quattro, let’s take a quick glance at the primary differences between the two cameras.
The Rolleiflex Hy6 with film vs. the Sigma Dp Quattro – Just for Laughs
Since then, a plethora of cameras with respectable electronic viewfinders have been available on the market (Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Leica, to mention a few…). I am familiar with LCD Loupes Sigma DP2 Merrill and Sigma DP2 Quattro since I have been using them on cameras that do not have a good dedicated EVF for a number of years now. An LCD loupe may be used in lieu of an electronic viewfinder.
I’ll be testing the color fidelity of the DP2Q in the near future! If the WB is correctly adjusted on site, it is possible that the color cast will be improved! In many respects, the Merrill’s unpredictability appeals to me, and it is one of their strongest assets. What more you come up with is something I’m looking forward to seeing. While the Q looks to have a little resolution edge over the M in distant foliage, there are several spots of the above photo where you can notice the Q’s modest resolution advantage over the M.
No, that’s not for me…but the DP1 with its 28mm lens is something I’m intrigued in since it would make a really excellent, portable landscape camera for travel. With these Foveon sensors, we’re in for some interesting times… It will be fascinating to watch what Canon introduces at Photokina this year; there have been a lot of rumors about them employing a layered sensor recently. The Dp2M or Q is not even close to being as quick as a DSLR when it comes to focusing. My experience with two other DP2Ms has been the same as with this one. The Quattro is somewhat quicker than the M, but it is still not competitive with any DSLR or Mirrorless camera that I have used thus yet.
It is not a point-and-shoot for a first-time camera buyer or for someone who has no prior understanding of how a camera operates. It is intended for folks who are obsessed with fine detail, vibrant color, and incredible micro contrast. It is intended for individuals who desire the appearance and feel of a Medium Format camera in a camera that is considerably smaller, lighter, and less expensive.