Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I've been in a bit of a photographic funk for some time now. I'd like to get back to the urban and rural landscapes I used to shoot years ago with both 4x5 and 6x6, but this time with an all digital workflow. Having a new toy doesn't hurt, either. ;-)
After a lot of introspection and analysis I'm thinking a dp0 Quattro with either a Hoodloupe or a LVF-01 loupe hood is the way to go, especially with the recent price reductions. The new ILC Quattro was announced after I came to this conclusion, but to be honest I think I'd do better with a dp0. I'd like to think I'd be using it almost exclusively on a tripod for monochrome, but who knows. I wouldn't be using it for the same action stuff I shoot now with SLR/DSLR or for the urban candid work for which I use RFs and similar digital bodies (Leica M, X100s, NEX7) - this would be a replacement for my 500C/M and 4x5.
How many dp0s do we have here at RFF? I know the workflow and hardware limitations are a bit of a hair shirt, but some of the results I've seen are technically stunning. Am I off my rocker for wanting one?
After a lot of introspection and analysis I'm thinking a dp0 Quattro with either a Hoodloupe or a LVF-01 loupe hood is the way to go, especially with the recent price reductions. The new ILC Quattro was announced after I came to this conclusion, but to be honest I think I'd do better with a dp0. I'd like to think I'd be using it almost exclusively on a tripod for monochrome, but who knows. I wouldn't be using it for the same action stuff I shoot now with SLR/DSLR or for the urban candid work for which I use RFs and similar digital bodies (Leica M, X100s, NEX7) - this would be a replacement for my 500C/M and 4x5.
How many dp0s do we have here at RFF? I know the workflow and hardware limitations are a bit of a hair shirt, but some of the results I've seen are technically stunning. Am I off my rocker for wanting one?
GaryLH
Veteran
I've had one since Xmas, but due to either weather or being sick on off till now, have not had a chance to use it much other than to test it out. There has been a new fw update that lowers to punchlines and gets rid of the overly red reds btw.
I know of two others on rff that have the dp0. I'll let them speak for themselves.
There is a pretty active thread over at getdpi about the dp0. Check it out.
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/other-cameras/55199-sigma-dp0-quattro-shots.html
So long as u shoot w/in its limitations, it is impressive. The 21:9 crop basically makes it feel like shooting a digital version of an xpan. I have my old 21/35 ovf from my Konica rf 21/35 on it presently.
IMHO, the only camera that gives it a run for its money is the Sony a7r. The a7rmk2 may beat it (speculation, only seen comparison results from a7r).
The 699 deal is hard to beat given what is essentially medium format quality output at premium p&s price. Albeit w/ quirks that drive most people away from the sigma cameras.
Good luck
Gary
I know of two others on rff that have the dp0. I'll let them speak for themselves.
There is a pretty active thread over at getdpi about the dp0. Check it out.
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/other-cameras/55199-sigma-dp0-quattro-shots.html
So long as u shoot w/in its limitations, it is impressive. The 21:9 crop basically makes it feel like shooting a digital version of an xpan. I have my old 21/35 ovf from my Konica rf 21/35 on it presently.
IMHO, the only camera that gives it a run for its money is the Sony a7r. The a7rmk2 may beat it (speculation, only seen comparison results from a7r).
The 699 deal is hard to beat given what is essentially medium format quality output at premium p&s price. Albeit w/ quirks that drive most people away from the sigma cameras.
Good luck
Gary
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I've been reading everything I can find about the do0 and looking at as many pics as I can. Very, very tempted... I tend to work best when I have equipment restrictions.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I also think renting a dp0 for a week before buying would be money well spent!
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
Or not. These seem to be in fairly short supply, especially the LVF-01. Ordered.
Now to find a QD plate...
Now to find a QD plate...
dfatty
Well-known
i don't have a dp0q but have been considering one since i'm a dpx merrill user. i look forward to hearing about your experience with it after you get it.
Samouraï
Well-known
I've been shooting with the dp0Q since release as a travel camera, and it's a been a blast. I've been shooting exclusively in 21:9. Handling is better than the Merrills, and the performance of the lens is impressive (though the Quattro sensor isn't as impressive as the Merrill). In hindsight, the dp1 focal length might have been a better choice, but the dp0 is a much better lens according to charts and data.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
Gary, that getDPI thread (and a few others there) made for interesting reading! I'm not super hardware-centric in that I'm not always chasing the absolute best, my fixation is more on if the equipment works with and for me or not.
dfatty, I'll post results!
Samouraï, I'll check out your photos when I get home - the photo sites are blocked here at the office. I'm thinking of using along the same lines as you - I suspect 21:9 will get a lot of use.
All - it looks like RRS doesn't do an L bracket for the Quattros. Is anyone aware of a decent L bracket before I try kludging one together?
dfatty, I'll post results!
Samouraï, I'll check out your photos when I get home - the photo sites are blocked here at the office. I'm thinking of using along the same lines as you - I suspect 21:9 will get a lot of use.
All - it looks like RRS doesn't do an L bracket for the Quattros. Is anyone aware of a decent L bracket before I try kludging one together?
GaryLH
Veteran
There is a kit sold on b&h that has dp0 plus lvf-1. Now I understand why it is priced as high as it was
.. When they dropped to 699, the kit price did not. That odd shaped grip on the dp Quattro line, not sure if u will find venders to do third party, not straight forward manufacturing.. Cost vs limit number of people willing to buy one.
Gary
GaryLH
Veteran
no prob.. I c too many people try this camera, then come away disappoint.. It is a camera that doesn't suit everyone, even those that have a Merrill.
I lurk over there occasionally on the foveon and a7 threads. Some very knowledgeable foveon guys over there.
Gary
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
There is a kit sold on b&h that has dp0 plus lvf-1. Now I understand why it is priced as high as it was
That odd shaped grip on the dp Quattro line, not sure if u will find venders to do third party, not straight forward manufacturing.. Cost vs limit number of people willing to buy one.
Gary
It looks like the LVF-01 has dropped in price, but not the dp0/LVF-01 kit. I picked up both separately plus a cable release.
The tech rep at RRS recommended one of their generic L plates, a MC-L. I'll look for one.
I think I'll be OK. I'm looking at this as a specialist camera system replacing my MF and LF for deliberate shooting, not for candids. It is what it is, I try to ignore all the measurabators arguing.
Chemophilic
Established
I too also had a dp0 for a few months and had been enjoying it. I bought it to replace my Xpan for daily snapshots, events, weddings etc, and I have also been shooting exclusively at the 21:9 ratio. Because I heard so many horrible things beforehand (handling, camera shape, high iso, bad software etc), I was pleasantly surprised that those weren't as bad. Well, high iso is not great but I can live with it. I am still learning how to use the software properly, such as doing a blue channel only B&W, but sometimes when the light is right, the jpegs straight out of camera is good enough. I will try to post some pictures in a few days as well.
As for QR, I have a peak design plate to use on the capture pro, working quite well too.
As for QR, I have a peak design plate to use on the capture pro, working quite well too.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
Chemophilic, I look forward to seeing your work!
I just received the tracking number - woot!
I just received the tracking number - woot!
Chemophilic
Established
Thanks! The more I use it, the more I like it. Here are a few of mine, jpegs straight out of camera. I haven't had time to play with SPP too much yet.
Foliage, tree
Bay Bridge portion
After rain
Foliage
Double Tree
Wedding decorations
Joshua Tree climbers
Hiking with family
Joshua Tree Sunset
Foliage, tree Bay Bridge portion After rain Foliage Double Tree Wedding decorations Joshua Tree climbers Hiking with family Joshua Tree Sunset
fireblade
Vincenzo.
Excellent detail Chemo, In the back of my mind i keep wanting to pull the trigger on the 0, but the Merrill 2M is keeping me happy.
dfatty
Well-known
nice, chemo, thanks for the samples. now if only the body wasn't shaped so strangely.
Chemophilic
Established
Thanks! The body might be shaped strangely, and some online reviewers equate that experience to some medieval torturing device. However, maybe because my hands are smaller? I never felt that my fingers are actually pressing against the edge. The way I grip it, the weight actually rests on my thumb so I never even feel the edge.
If I really need to I think I can handle this camera with one hand. Though with a aperture of f4 and max of iso 800 (base on my personal preference), it's not likely I'm going to be wielding this with one hand anytime soon...
re: Ken - congrats on your dp0!
If I really need to I think I can handle this camera with one hand. Though with a aperture of f4 and max of iso 800 (base on my personal preference), it's not likely I'm going to be wielding this with one hand anytime soon...
re: Ken - congrats on your dp0!
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
"Out for delivery"... I love those words!
I'm curious how higher ISOs will hold up for monochrome. I'm OK with staying at base sensitivity, but having usable ISO 400 or even higher would be nice for some work.
I'm curious how higher ISOs will hold up for monochrome. I'm OK with staying at base sensitivity, but having usable ISO 400 or even higher would be nice for some work.
GaryLH
Veteran
IMHO the Quattro improved one stop from Merrill all around. A lot depends on how picky u are to noise issue both in luminance and chroma....
I'm fine w/ 400 ISO and sometimes even at 640 but by 800 it is just ok for me in color. I can live w/ 1600 in monochrome. The Merrill could no get to 1600 w/o playing w/ the blue channel trick which killed tonal quality since u are removing the red and green channel info from the monochrome. Monochrome mode simply removed the chroma noise from the equation.. Some still didn't like what was left. So it really depends on how picky u are.
The pre-Merrill sensors, I've been told people never go above 400 period. I don't own a pre-Merrill.
Gary
I'm fine w/ 400 ISO and sometimes even at 640 but by 800 it is just ok for me in color. I can live w/ 1600 in monochrome. The Merrill could no get to 1600 w/o playing w/ the blue channel trick which killed tonal quality since u are removing the red and green channel info from the monochrome. Monochrome mode simply removed the chroma noise from the equation.. Some still didn't like what was left. So it really depends on how picky u are.
The pre-Merrill sensors, I've been told people never go above 400 period. I don't own a pre-Merrill.
Gary
GaryLH
Veteran
Forgot to mention, the new version of SPP has a film grain simulation mode, some people have report it providing an interesting way of hiding noise in b&w.
If there is a weakness in the whole system, it has got to be SPP. But once u learn it, it works fine but slow. I tend to batch process. For some people it crashes a lot. For me, I've been lucky, it rarely crashes.
U can either shoot jpg+raw or just plain raw. SPP can batch process extracting the embedded jpgs from the raw (actually fairly fast). On a Mac, there is a third party program that can view the embedded raw.. I can't remember the name right now.
The point is use the jpg to decide which ones u want to go thru the raw to tiff processing in SPP..
I do find that the Quattro jpgs are actually quite usable compared to the ones from prior sensor families. I think the Quattro was the first to have enough CPU horsepower to do the job right. However if u wish to get the most out of these files then use raw files. I've found that out of let's say 10 keepers out of a bunch of shots, maybe I'll go thru the trouble of putting 3 thru SPP processing.. Other times it maybe none, just use the jpgs. W/ the Merrill, they were so poor, I never used the jpgs. I know others who always use the raw keepers because they want to squeeze the most info out of the files. Again a lit depends on how picky u are.
Good luck and enjoy.
Gary
If there is a weakness in the whole system, it has got to be SPP. But once u learn it, it works fine but slow. I tend to batch process. For some people it crashes a lot. For me, I've been lucky, it rarely crashes.
U can either shoot jpg+raw or just plain raw. SPP can batch process extracting the embedded jpgs from the raw (actually fairly fast). On a Mac, there is a third party program that can view the embedded raw.. I can't remember the name right now.
The point is use the jpg to decide which ones u want to go thru the raw to tiff processing in SPP..
I do find that the Quattro jpgs are actually quite usable compared to the ones from prior sensor families. I think the Quattro was the first to have enough CPU horsepower to do the job right. However if u wish to get the most out of these files then use raw files. I've found that out of let's say 10 keepers out of a bunch of shots, maybe I'll go thru the trouble of putting 3 thru SPP processing.. Other times it maybe none, just use the jpgs. W/ the Merrill, they were so poor, I never used the jpgs. I know others who always use the raw keepers because they want to squeeze the most info out of the files. Again a lit depends on how picky u are.
Good luck and enjoy.
Gary