HTC 10 Review
Sony RX10 III Review
Canon EOS M10 Review
Microsoft Lumia 950 Review
Nikon Coolpix A100 Review
Nikon Coolpix A10 Review
Fujifilm FinePix XP90 Review
Huawei P9 Review
Canon EOS 80D Review
Nikon D500 Review
Canon PowerShot SX610 HS
Nikon Coolpix S7000
Canon EOS 1300D
Canon PowerShot SX720 HS
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ70
Canon EOS 1200D
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX80
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ100
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX90V
why a 4.5 when the sony hx got a 5?
10:40 am - Saturday, July 2, 2011
I agree: the Image Quality is clearly a 5.0 when compared to other similar cameras.
2:28 pm - Saturday, July 2, 2011
Absolutely, 5.0 on Image Quality. But, look: it is a point and shoot digital pocket camera. Amazing.I gotta try it ...
3:47 pm - Saturday, July 2, 2011
its because is an overpriced quirky camera with the literal image quality of a circa 2002 DSLR, better than point and clicks but hardly comparable to a good EVIL or budget DSLR. As the reviewer stated there are much much better alternatives to this camera for the price with better image quality, many of which who also come from a brand with an ‘S’ in front.
2:36 am - Sunday, July 3, 2011
Are you serious??? Or are you blind?
7:37 am - Sunday, July 3, 2011
I’m a long time Sigma user and have to say that there is nothing that would tempt me back to a bayer sensor. The Foveon wins every time.
The idea that a bayer sensor is higher resolution is nonsense. The bayer does not create a full colour pixel at each photosite - it takes the monochrome output from that photosite and interpolating the other two colours from neighbouring pixels. That is *not* the same as a properly exposed pixel. Each pixel in a Foveon created image is exactly as exposed not some interpreted colour value. Every bayer created image has to be processed (either in the camera or later on your computer) and as such is not a true record of the scene you pointed the camera at. An image from a Foveon sensor can be mapped straight to a bitmap file of some sort. What you get is what you saw.
Then there is the increased noise and lack of sensitivity from having such small photosites. The Foveon’s huge advantage over bayer sensors is it’s huge dynamic range. Bayer users may need the fakery of HDR, Foveon users just shoot and have the dynamic range right there in the image file.
All in all it’s just like shooting on slide film. And strangely enough you get a very “filmic” quality straight from any Sigma camera that no bayer sensor can match. In my film days I was a dedicated Kodachrome user, I was never happy with the results I got from a digital camera until I bought my first Sigma.
9:55 pm - Sunday, July 3, 2011
For a large sensor camera, Sigma still sucks in low light and that’s why they get a low score in IQ. IQ quality is excellent in daytime, but poor in low light. So there you go.
4:24 am - Monday, July 4, 2011
Seriously you Sigma users need to wake up; you are almost as obnoxious as Konica fanboys. It is you who have been blind to anything else for five years.
2:17 am - Saturday, July 9, 2011
I own an DP1s and not the DP2x, but I’m about to get one DP2s/x soon.
In the compact class I also own an E-P1 with a 20mm/1.7 lens (and an LX3 and a lot of other stuff). But I leave them at home over the DP1s when ever I can; meaning if its daytime. I only use my PEN after sunset and indoors. The dynamic range of this sensor simply annoys me.
The Foveon sensor on the other hand handles the dynamic range on a sunny day like nothin I’ve seen on a digital camera ever. Shooting in RAW, -1EV and you don’t even have to carefully expose your pictures; just seconds of postprocessing in SSP and chances are you get results with beautiful tonal range you couldn’t achieve differently (also not with the big guys including the newest Sony sensors with RAW).
In many aspects my DP1s sucks but there is also no real comparison to it; regardless what I pay :(
8:47 am - Saturday, July 9, 2011
The Foveon sensor on the other hand handles the dynamic range on a sunny day like nothin I’ve seen on a digital camera ever. Shooting in RAW, -1EV and you don’t even have to carefully expose your pictures; just seconds of post-processing in SSP and chances are you get results with beautiful tonal range you couldn’t achieve differently (also not with the big guys including the newest Sony sensors with RAW).
9:12 am - Saturday, July 9, 2011
@Mhut you said it. Dynamic range is where it’s at.
When I first moved to a Sigma I automatically switched on auto-bracket assuming that, like every other digital camera I have ever used, I would need to use HDR. I found after one session that you simply don’t need it with a Foveon sensor. Most digital sensors are apalling when it comes to dynamic range, the Foveon is up there with film. With most sensors you simply can’t expose by the zone system. Expose for zone 3 as detailed shadow and you’re burned out by zone 7, 8 at best. So you need to use merged image HDR techniques to get a reasonable image. OTOH I find I can get detail in zones 3 through 8 with a Sigma and only zone 9 is burned out. Which is exactly the way it should be.
As for the low light performance being poor with a Sigma. Maybe there’s something up with the metering on the DP2x. I’ve certainly never had problems in low light. I have some beautiful ambient light shots taken in the undercrofts of fountains abbey which are absolutely stunning. When you bear in mind that there is a window in shot with the sky right in zone 9, but the image still shows shadow detail that’s quite a stretch for a digital camera and the sort of thing I previously thought was only possible on Kodachrome.
The handling on the DP series may seem a little clunky if you happen to be a snapper who wants the camera to make your decisions for you. But if you think like that then this isn’t the camera for you, stick with your multiple scene modes. I always find it funny the number of camera users (not photographers) who claim manual control is important to them, but have to have twenty-odd scene modes built in. Remember you are the author of the image, not the camera. Go manual. Take it slow. And carefully create your image. That’s real photography.
If you want point and shoot convenince that’s fine, but don’t pretend to be a photographer.
9:24 pm - Thursday, July 21, 2011
pics really looks royally
8:01 pm - Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Once you took your time to understand the Sigma DP1 or DP2 there is no way to get back to Bayer sensors. Yes, the Sigmas are slow and you are limited to ISO 400 ISO, maybe ISO 800 at best. But Sigma DP users are mostly the same people who used to shoot film. Reversible film….so that ISO 400 is high enough speed ! With the small Sigma they can get something that no compact offer: depth of field control and old time colors rivaling the Autochromes of Louis Amedee Mante… All in a very pocketable small camera. That`s coming cheaper and cheaper during these days. Enjoy !
P.S. Forget Jpeg ! Sigma`s Foveon is all about RAW ! Except the case you like b&w….
11:11 pm - Friday, December 9, 2011
I really wish they’d make one with a built in viewfinder. I’d buy that.
11:17 pm - Monday, June 25, 2012
Hallo Garry !
A viewfinder for the little Sigmas ? You can purchase one of the many existing models framing for either 28 or 40 mm and attach it on but this won`t allow you to accurately focus….
For accurate focusing, framing and depth of field control you should better use manual focussing on the camera LCD. It`s also faster. Much faster….
12:44 pm - Wednesday, July 18, 2012
What happened picture # 16? It’s more purple than “Deep Purple”
7:15 pm - Tuesday, August 14, 2012
The image quality is outstanding. If other cameras got 5, the Sigma should get 6.
3:07 am - Sunday, November 10, 2013
Erran Stewart Photography
This camera looks pretty slick. I like it.
1:12 am - Friday, November 15, 2013
Wedding Photographer London
What is the build quality like?
1:13 am - Friday, November 15, 2013
2.5 inch LCD,
Sigma DP2x Review
Camera Reviews ·
Camera Buying Guide
Camera Buying Guide
Lens Reviews ·
Photography News ·
Best Digital Cameras
Best Digital Cameras
Best Compact Cameras
Best Compact Cameras
Photo Gallery ·
© Copyright 2003-2016 Photo 360 Limited