It probably hasn't escaped your attention that I'm up to part 4 here and up to now I haven't written a word! Perhaps this Google+ conversation I had this morning might shed some light on that.
Chris Handley
Impression?
david taylor-hughes
Still trying to work that out. Not your run of the mill camera!!
Chris Handley
I don't think it's a camera you fall in love with, the images yes, but if only Sigma had made the camera a thing of beauty.
I've had numerous people ask me about high ISO, but I think they're missing the point. You purchase this camera to capture superb images in a slow methodical manner and are justly rewarded. It's not a point and shoot, although it may look like one - and there the problem lies.
I've had numerous people ask me about high ISO, but I think they're missing the point. You purchase this camera to capture superb images in a slow methodical manner and are justly rewarded. It's not a point and shoot, although it may look like one - and there the problem lies.
david taylor-hughes
What
you write pretty much sums it up. I think it is the incongruity I'm
struggling with. In terms of sharpness, resolution, colour separation
and clarity I haven't seen anything better. The output makes pretty much
everything else look like its got clingfilm in front of it! That this
then comes from a small metal-like box with a lens on it with no proper
viewfinder and pathetic battery life is unexpected, to say the least. A
bit like producing 5x4 negatives from an instamatic.
As you indicated when you first got yours, the AF is actually not that bad, and as you also indicate its an ISO 100 camera only as far as I'm concerned.
"but if only Sigma had made the camera a thing of beauty" Indeed. That its not, and I'm having real trouble equating the two. I'm still trying to work out how to start writing about it, which is proving more difficult than usual. I usually have an instant response to cameras but this one has got me somewhat bewildered. The Michael Reichmann review at Luminous Landscape pretty much sums up most of what I think about it - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sigma_dp2m_review.shtml - however I want to not just repeat that.
I'm never usually at a loss for words!! but I am struggling with this.
As you indicated when you first got yours, the AF is actually not that bad, and as you also indicate its an ISO 100 camera only as far as I'm concerned.
"but if only Sigma had made the camera a thing of beauty" Indeed. That its not, and I'm having real trouble equating the two. I'm still trying to work out how to start writing about it, which is proving more difficult than usual. I usually have an instant response to cameras but this one has got me somewhat bewildered. The Michael Reichmann review at Luminous Landscape pretty much sums up most of what I think about it - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sigma_dp2m_review.shtml - however I want to not just repeat that.
I'm never usually at a loss for words!! but I am struggling with this.
Chris Handley
Beauty and the Beast might be a suitable title
N.B. to see more on the cameras and lenses featured in this post click on the relevant labels (tags and keywords) below.
All original material on this blog is © Soundimageplus
For comment and discussion - join me over at Google+
about soundimageplus - soundimageplus website
follow on twitter - http://twitter.com/#!/soundimageplus
follow on facebook - http://www.facebook.com/soundimageplus
follow by email - http://feeds.feedburner.com/Soundimageplus
soundimageplus on flickr - http://www.flickr.com/photos/45203414@N06/
soundimageplus blog readers pictures group - http://www.flickr.com/groups/1705334@N24/
soundimageplus on YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/user/soundimageplus
soundimageplus on Vimeo - http://vimeo.com/user1050904/video