Comments on: Sigma DP2 Review at The Online Photographer

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 29 May 2009 23:42:24 +0000

Thanks tommy!

By: Tommy

Tommy — Fri, 29 May 2009 20:15:08 +0000

There’s another decent review here: http://www.camera-blog.net/2009/05/27/sigma-dp2-an-in-depth-review-part-1/

Many of the same conclusions, but that review isn’t quite as harsh as Ken’s.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 29 May 2009 04:01:45 +0000

I meant other than the DP2, if that wasn’t clear…

By: Kendall Helmstetter Gelner

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner — Fri, 29 May 2009 02:08:52 +0000

Eliott – the camera is very useful in low light. It has far better noise than any other small sensor P&S at ISO 1600 & 3200 (yes they are noisy, but 3200 delivers a great B&W image).

It’s also is much mire useful than the DP-1 for successive shots, you can take shots all day long spread out a few seconds between each.

By: Elliot

Elliot — Thu, 28 May 2009 23:42:07 +0000

Agreed. I walk around all day with a D90, a 17-50, and occasionally a 50-150. On the shoulder and in the hand it gets tiring. A quality compact would be nice. But I think we won’t see a compact with equivalent IQ and low light IQ and fast AF and good high-ISO IQ in one package, not for the next few years. Personally I’m willing to give in on the IQ a bit in favor of handling and quick shooting, which is why I currently favor Ricoh’s GX-200. High-ISO means significant grain, but if you’re willing to incorporate that in your aesthetic it’s probably the best shooting compact on the market today.
I spent a weekend with a friend’s G1 and I was very impressed overall, but it’s a neither-fish-nor-fowl type of camera that doesn’t really work for me as a replacement for anything.

It will be interesting to see what Samsung’s hybrid looks like next year, and we’ll have to see whether Olympus’s m43 compact has Sigma-like teething pains….

By: Eolake Stobblehouse

Eolake Stobblehouse — Thu, 28 May 2009 23:35:03 +0000

“compact cameras mean sub-par IQ”

No, that’s the one thing the DP2 proves, they need not.
Now it just needs to be fast and reliable.

I wonder if Panasonic may deliver something interesting.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Thu, 28 May 2009 23:20:56 +0000

Hmm…I certainly wouldn’t follow his lead, I’ll make my own decisions, hopefully informed. But I do agree as I said with the notion that if the result is what you’re after, then you’re apt to give up some usability. That said, I’m actually most excited about what Olympus may offer next month–could make this whole conversation moot. One thing is clear though, compact cameras mean sub-par IQ, I really don’t want to compromise on that–but I want a compact.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Thu, 28 May 2009 23:08:56 +0000

Oh,
ditto on Olympus.

By: Elliot

Elliot — Thu, 28 May 2009 23:08:27 +0000

Mike is the Hamlet of camerablogs. Couldn’t come up with a #2 in his Top 10 cameras earlier this month, has been dithering over which new DSLR to buy, and his choice of his first/only DSLR was the noisy, gadgety Konica-Minolta 7D. He has a bit of an anti-Canon bias too — after literally years discussing the pros and cons of various DSLRs and brands he finally admitted (in the comments section, no less) that he’d never seen or touched the 5D). I really pity anyone who takes his advice or follows his lead. He’s knowledgeable about certain things, but he has a fondness for gadgets (like his high-end audio mania) that sometimes casts a shadow over his decisionmaking process.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Thu, 28 May 2009 23:08:27 +0000

Yeah I was looking at that post today, sounds like deja vu? But I totally agree, look at folks using large format in the field. There’s nothing easy about the entire practice, but folks do it for the results.