Sigma DP2 - second APS-C Foveon-based compact camera

no-X

samples (must see!)

http://www.sigma-dp.com/DP2/sample-photo/

e.g.:
http://www.sigma-dp.com/DP2/sample-photo/img/SigmaDP2-011.jpg

website:

http://www.sigma-dp.com/DP2/main.html

optical diagram of the lens (24.2/2.8 - 42/2.8 effective):

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/compact/2009/03/03/10320.html

more pictures of the camera and its menu:

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2009/03/05/10311.html

more samples (PDF - 42MB):

http://www.sigma-dp.com/data/DP2_catalog/en/DP2_Catalog2009_EN.pdf

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

Very high quality, but what on earth do they mean with "all the power of an SLR"? Sort of implies interchangeable lenses - actually quite misleading advertising, but what else is new?

patrickh

F16SUNSHINE · Expire: 2011-11-18

Have always been interested in the DP1 this is even more appealing.
Be nice to see some high ISO samples in this group. Max was 200 Confused

no-X · Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:58 am Post subject:

I think something is wrong there. The 1st ISO200 sample shows a bit more noise, than I'd expect. Nothing horrible, but I'd guess the image was sligthly underexposed. Or Sigma decided to remove the noise less agressively to preserve more details(?)

Rob Leslie · Joined: 20 Mar 2007 Posts: 1103 Location: UK Swindon

no-X · Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 1:14 pm Post subject:

I use SD14, which is noisier than DP1. ISO200 can be clear if the image is exposed properly - not underexposed. Old Foveon sensors used in SD9 and SD10 was prone to overexposure, the new-one (SD14/DP1/DP2) is prone to underexposure. Many users just sets EV to +0.3 or +0.7 to correct this.

Here's my ISO200 shot. Converted from RAW - contrast, shadows, higlights and X3FL are untouched to avoid any clipping:

100% crop of the left border - shadows:

200% enlargement:

None green blotches, none color noise...

BruceB · Joined: 28 Feb 2009 Posts: 32

This new camera could actually be considered the "third" foveon-based compact camera, if one counts the initial attempt: the aborted Polaroid X530. Smile

I recently picked up a new X530 on eBay for $60, and it's been a fun experience: stunning colors when shot in RAW and processed through the Sigma software. Has certainly piqued my interest in the DP series.

no-X · Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:25 pm Post subject:

X530 was the first Foveon-based compact camera, but its sensor is not APS-C - sized.

Anyway, the SPP and the Polaroid studio is the same software - both of them were developed by Foveon and only logos were different Smile

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

Foveon seems to be suffering from the Sony Beta syndrome - popular demand has abandoned it and there is not enough money to develop what has to be a very neat scientific precept. Crying or Very sad

patrickh

no-X · Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:26 pm Post subject:

Sigma bought Foveon short time ago. I think if they haven't plans with it, they wouldn't do it.

Full-frame foveon with current pixel density would have 14 megapixels ("42" sigmas megapixel) and that would be on par with 30 megapixel bayer sensor. The quality would be stunning.

Or medium format - a lot of medium format sensor are noisier than midrange DSLR. So noise wouldn't be an issue. The smallest medium format - 36×48 would mean 28 megapixel foveon ("84" megapixel) - quality comparable to 60 megapixel bayer...

Even somethink like APS-H (Canon 1D - not Ds) would double current resolution without need of increasing pixel density. There is a lot of space for interesting products even if the current pixel size cannot be made smaller.

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

Problem is - I don't know if Sigma has the resources either. They certainly have more than Foveon, who could not raise capital. I think Sigma bought them more as a defensive measure than anything. I really hope I am wrong, but in today's economic climate even Sigma has to be at risk.

patrickh

no-X · Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:49 am Post subject:

You are right likely, but I think they don't need to spend much money for development urgently to create product, which will be more interesting for customers. I think the most logical step would be to use current technology and only manufacture bigger sensors.

The reason, why Foveon sensor was smaller, than other APS-C sensors, were lower yields. I think this issue was very likely solved during the years. Producing of bigger sensor with current technology shouldn't be too risky.

APS-C (Sigma, 1.7x) ~ 4.7MP
APS-C (Nikon, 1.5x) ~ 6.1MP
APS-H (Canon, 1.25x) ~ 9.0MP
full-size / full-frame ~ 14.1MP

Even Nikon-sized APS-C should move the Foveon to competitive position in terms of luminance resolution to many todays DSLRs.