capitalK
Warrior Poet :P
Pogue used to be a writer/editor for MacWorld magazine, which will probably explain a lot to people not familiar with his "style" of reporting. This review was pretty subdued for him, he can get pretty zany.
amateriat
We're all light!
Not only that, but I'll bet that Pogue was at least smart enough to bounce the DP-1 off some Times staff shooters before putting fingers to keyboard. The man ain't perfect, but he manages not to put his foot in his mouth too many times, at least when I've been watching.
- Barrett
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
Here's a suggestion. Maybe the Times should get rid or Mr. Pogue and hire Ken Rockwell...
(The above message is intended solely as sarcasm).
(The above message is intended solely as sarcasm).
S
Simon Larbalestier
Guest
I guess that must be me then
Despite its design and operational drawbacks, the DPI works well enough for my needs.
Last edited by a moderator:
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
All the "shortcomings" of the camera are things that I really don't miss. Prime lens, no IS, focusing at a foot sounds great! Maybe it could be a little faster, but hell who's machine gunning off point and shoot shots anyway. The optical viewfinder option is a con? most point and shoots don't give you that option for any price. Do you need to see the colors on the LCD screen to compose?
I guess I don't fit into the average point and shoot demographic.
I guess I don't fit into the average point and shoot demographic.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
I'm kind of bemused here.. people are concerned about how rapidly one can take shots with this camera not the image quality. I wonder how many of us RF users have rapid winders or motorized winders on our Leica's or Nikons for "street photography"
All cameras are a compromise except in the area that they are designed for. No surprise there. So why focus on the obvious shortcomings in design? Because it's an easy target? I'm not sure. Based on Reichmann's review (who doesn't influence me much) the image quality is there, take a look for yourself. For my use in street photography I would say this is a better solution than the Ricoh GRD series and the Canon PS/9; if Reichmann is accurate.
Then again maybe a 'Leica Barnak' might be the answer.
All cameras are a compromise except in the area that they are designed for. No surprise there. So why focus on the obvious shortcomings in design? Because it's an easy target? I'm not sure. Based on Reichmann's review (who doesn't influence me much) the image quality is there, take a look for yourself. For my use in street photography I would say this is a better solution than the Ricoh GRD series and the Canon PS/9; if Reichmann is accurate.
Then again maybe a 'Leica Barnak' might be the answer.
sweathog
Well-known
Yes! That is a fantastic idea!
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I think I can do considerably better than the reported 7 seconds shot-to-shot time (RAW) with my DS M3 and change shutter speed or aperture or focus (or probably all three) while doing so whereas the DP-1 is reportedly unresponsive to controls while writing to its SD card. I could live with its reported AF lag since it has apparently low shutter lag when pre-focused. But the slow shot-to-shot time and control lockout would be deal-killers for me.
A pity, since I want the DP-1 to succeed and establish the class of larger-sensor digital compact.
...Mike
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I'm beginning to think this might be right. I LOVE the DP1's images...the files are really something to behold, and there is definitely something different about the Foveon. The colors are beautiful, and the crispness, right down to the pixel level, is breathtaking.
But things really start to get crummy in low light, and at those times I wish I'd bit the bullet and brought my DSLR. I am wondering how long Sigma is going to cling to Foveon; by now the thing ought to be as good at 1600 or 3200 as any APS-C size sensor, and it just isn't, not even, apparently, in their top-of-the-line DSLR. I wonder if this is just an inherent flaw in the technology, and impossible to solve.
I do think that, in ten years, owning a working Foveon camera will be kind of cool, and perhaps this camera will be a collector's item and technological curiosity. For now, though, it's just a strange and deeply flawed camera that can nevertheless take great pictures, if you let it.
blazeicehockey
Brand New In Box
Have you tried a foveon camera? Hardly obsolete technology when it can knock the socks off all P&S cameras out there at low ISO, is compared favourably to the Canon 5D, E-3 and SD14 at 28mm. OK its slow, but that does not make it obsolete. Until Canon et al can come up with something half as good, I'll stick to the DP1.
Last edited:
AJShepherd
Well-known
blazeicehockey
Brand New In Box
Lucky then that I have:
a) a four thirds camera with the excellent 14-54 and 11-22 lenses
b) a om adapter to make a lovely little mf camera using some zuiko lenses.
c) a hope and a prayer that they will make a M to micro 4/3 adapter so that I can use my RF lenses.
In the meantime I can compare foveon and Oly side by side, and foveon is still tops on final IQ (apart from quirky reds.....)